Houzz Forum: Is Urban Planning Missing on India's Agenda?
Three of the country's foremost architects express their views on the state of urban planning
This discussion series brings together the country’s top design professionals to voice their opinions and insights on all matters related to architecture & design.
Indian cities are burdened with expectations to appear like Shanghai while high population density and poor infrastructure create basic urban problems such ad hoc construction, water shortages in the summer and waterlogging in the monsoon, mind-numbing traffic jams, and much more. Adding to it are issues like the Amravati case – where it is proposed that the new plan of the city be based on the mythical city as shown in the movie Baahubali. Is the future of our old and new cities in grave danger? Here, we question what it is that we are missing and, if there is any hope, what would help create better urban planning to create better neighbourhoods to live in.
Indian cities are burdened with expectations to appear like Shanghai while high population density and poor infrastructure create basic urban problems such ad hoc construction, water shortages in the summer and waterlogging in the monsoon, mind-numbing traffic jams, and much more. Adding to it are issues like the Amravati case – where it is proposed that the new plan of the city be based on the mythical city as shown in the movie Baahubali. Is the future of our old and new cities in grave danger? Here, we question what it is that we are missing and, if there is any hope, what would help create better urban planning to create better neighbourhoods to live in.
© Mallikarjun Katakol
Bijoy Ramachandran
Founding Partner & Design Principal,
Hundredhands, Bangalore
Creating a plan for a city is a long-term proposition that requires vision and political will. This prolonged gestation and the necessity for constructive collaboration are both inconvenient conditions for local authorities that look for short-term solutions to showcase their achievements during their tentative tenures.
Due to a serious lack of awareness of what a plan does or how it works, it is either a hastily put together document or a grandiose gesture. The Bangalore Masterplan, prepared in an incredible two-year period was an example of the former, and the Amaravati plan, which is now being discussed, is an example of the latter. Neither of these models will work. Urban planning and design must set out to do, primarily, two things:
1. Address time and change
Plans must make long-term propositions which estimate growth and changing conditions with regard to demographics, economics, climate, accessibility, nature of work, and so on. Successful planning exercises, including Basavanagudi and Malleswaram (in Bangalore), show resilience and the ability to accommodate change and retain a sense of place over time.
2. Create a sense of place
Apart from providing for the future, it is also essential that the plan serves the need for the creation of a sense of place and identity. This usually comes from careful observation and understanding of the location and culture of the context.
Today’s smart city proposals fail to address these conditions and mostly focus on artificially demarcated areas within larger cities, tackling issues that concern the management of services and utilities. Though these strategies are essential, a deep-rooted understanding of the location and the wider region must augment this.
To be fair, though, the pressures we face in our cities are unprecedented. Most of our models continue to be from the west or places like Singapore where rapid growth and complex social structures simply do not exist at this scale. We may be the future of those cities and how we tackle these challenges of time and place, will serve as lessons for them.
Bijoy Ramachandran
Founding Partner & Design Principal,
Hundredhands, Bangalore
Creating a plan for a city is a long-term proposition that requires vision and political will. This prolonged gestation and the necessity for constructive collaboration are both inconvenient conditions for local authorities that look for short-term solutions to showcase their achievements during their tentative tenures.
Due to a serious lack of awareness of what a plan does or how it works, it is either a hastily put together document or a grandiose gesture. The Bangalore Masterplan, prepared in an incredible two-year period was an example of the former, and the Amaravati plan, which is now being discussed, is an example of the latter. Neither of these models will work. Urban planning and design must set out to do, primarily, two things:
1. Address time and change
Plans must make long-term propositions which estimate growth and changing conditions with regard to demographics, economics, climate, accessibility, nature of work, and so on. Successful planning exercises, including Basavanagudi and Malleswaram (in Bangalore), show resilience and the ability to accommodate change and retain a sense of place over time.
2. Create a sense of place
Apart from providing for the future, it is also essential that the plan serves the need for the creation of a sense of place and identity. This usually comes from careful observation and understanding of the location and culture of the context.
Today’s smart city proposals fail to address these conditions and mostly focus on artificially demarcated areas within larger cities, tackling issues that concern the management of services and utilities. Though these strategies are essential, a deep-rooted understanding of the location and the wider region must augment this.
To be fair, though, the pressures we face in our cities are unprecedented. Most of our models continue to be from the west or places like Singapore where rapid growth and complex social structures simply do not exist at this scale. We may be the future of those cities and how we tackle these challenges of time and place, will serve as lessons for them.
© Chirag Jain
Chirag Jain
Co-founder, Vimal Jain Foundation
In commissioning Chandigarh, Nehru’s brief to Corbusier was to design “…a new town, symbolic of the freedom of India, unfettered by the traditions of the past”. The city, to the statesman’s mind, was an expression of “the nation’s faith in the future”. Ah! There was, then, in the public realm, a place for grand ideas. We sought our buildings to not just allow us to lead better lives, work better but also create for us a sense of identity. Architecture as a gesture, as an expression of something larger, much larger than the sum total of all its construction.
Developmental projects are today mere exercises in capital expenditures – conceived and deployed for their economics. It is, therefore, logical that their ideas of ‘avante garde’ aesthetics are limited to imitations of successful models from elsewhere in the world. We’ve had political leaders envisioning building Shanghais and Singapores in India and, not to forget, most recently, a radical amongst them, desiring inspiration from film sets in the building of a new capital. It is a bit unfair to expect them to take delight in Raag Malhaar when all they have heard for music is Sheela ki jawaani!
Much of what we’re doing stands tall as a symbol of failure of our own imaginations. Urban planning has been missing on the agenda because the agenda has no space for it. Urban projects, today, serve a warped, selfish and specific purpose – furthering the agendas of a select few. The architect and his architecture are merely the means to an end. A necessary embellishment like plating, where cheeky facades should do the job.
You see, urban planning isn’t really missing on the agenda after all. It’s there. It just means different things to people that make it happen. Perhaps it is time we reflect upon the state of architecture and its place in the public discourse. Perhaps it is time we discussed, debated and envisioned architecture in a manner and language that is inviting and inclusive. Perhaps it is time we sought out our politicians, bureaucrats, industrialists, policy makers, social leaders to engage with the fraternity in discussing ideas and making them happen.
The country is building at a rate like never before – cities, towns, public housing, industrial parks, urban transportation – and if an intervention isn’t made now, we may well end up leaving behind a legacy of eclectic theme parks!
Read more:
Houzz Forum: State of Indian Design
Houzz Forum: State of Indian Architecture Today and Tomorrow
Tell us:
Give us your opinion on the need for urban planning for our cities. Share in Comments below.
Chirag Jain
Co-founder, Vimal Jain Foundation
In commissioning Chandigarh, Nehru’s brief to Corbusier was to design “…a new town, symbolic of the freedom of India, unfettered by the traditions of the past”. The city, to the statesman’s mind, was an expression of “the nation’s faith in the future”. Ah! There was, then, in the public realm, a place for grand ideas. We sought our buildings to not just allow us to lead better lives, work better but also create for us a sense of identity. Architecture as a gesture, as an expression of something larger, much larger than the sum total of all its construction.
Developmental projects are today mere exercises in capital expenditures – conceived and deployed for their economics. It is, therefore, logical that their ideas of ‘avante garde’ aesthetics are limited to imitations of successful models from elsewhere in the world. We’ve had political leaders envisioning building Shanghais and Singapores in India and, not to forget, most recently, a radical amongst them, desiring inspiration from film sets in the building of a new capital. It is a bit unfair to expect them to take delight in Raag Malhaar when all they have heard for music is Sheela ki jawaani!
Much of what we’re doing stands tall as a symbol of failure of our own imaginations. Urban planning has been missing on the agenda because the agenda has no space for it. Urban projects, today, serve a warped, selfish and specific purpose – furthering the agendas of a select few. The architect and his architecture are merely the means to an end. A necessary embellishment like plating, where cheeky facades should do the job.
You see, urban planning isn’t really missing on the agenda after all. It’s there. It just means different things to people that make it happen. Perhaps it is time we reflect upon the state of architecture and its place in the public discourse. Perhaps it is time we discussed, debated and envisioned architecture in a manner and language that is inviting and inclusive. Perhaps it is time we sought out our politicians, bureaucrats, industrialists, policy makers, social leaders to engage with the fraternity in discussing ideas and making them happen.
The country is building at a rate like never before – cities, towns, public housing, industrial parks, urban transportation – and if an intervention isn’t made now, we may well end up leaving behind a legacy of eclectic theme parks!
Read more:
Houzz Forum: State of Indian Design
Houzz Forum: State of Indian Architecture Today and Tomorrow
Tell us:
Give us your opinion on the need for urban planning for our cities. Share in Comments below.
Pinkish Shah
Dean Academic Affairs, Kamla Raheja Vidyanidhi Institute of Architecture, Mumbai.
Founding Partner & Design Principal,
S+PS Architects
The Amravati story, as it has unfolded so far, has all the ingredients of a typical Tollywood potboiler, but unfortunately, the way it is currently headed, we seem to be in for a massive anticlimax. Unfortunately, this is real life and not a three-hour saga on screen. The effects of this will be permanent and for generations to come.
How have we gone from the days of Chandigarh and Le Corbusier to this?
Part of the problem seems to be that we (as a nation or state) don’t seem to either know who we are any more or what we aspire to become (if either can ever be a singular idea). As much as the politicians have failed us, the institutions that represent our profession have failed us more. There seems to be a complete collapse of any kind of institutional process and method by which to conduct, evaluate and enforce competitive processes with the powers that be. We need to build and grow a competitive system based on merit, value, and ethics, learning from the best practices of the world, in order for us to help build the nation. Most importantly, we seem to have forgotten to involve the people we build for in this process. How can you go from random opinions and social media comments as a benchmark to keep modifying designs, to a method where we are able to engage in a critical dialogue and discussion about design, architecture and the built environment amongst the masses?
The architecture fraternity needs to do a deep rethink and introspect how we wish to make ourselves relevant to society again – as mere scenographers or effectors of relevant and genuine change.